Category Archives: Campaign finance

Benicia City Council, Campaign finance, Local elections, Local Regulation, Negative campaigning

How to make Benicia campaigns fairer and more transparent

Please attend Benicia City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 15, 7pm at City Hall.  If you can’t make it, send your thoughts by email.
Benicia’s CURRENT campaign ordinances can be viewed at codepublishing.com/CA/Benicia/. Chapters 1.36, 1.40 and 1.42 are the main election ordinances. In particular, see Chapter 1.40 “Disclosure of Contributions and Expenditures in Candidate and Ballot Measure Elections.”- R.S.]

Possible improvements to Benicia’s campaign ordinance

By Roger Straw, January 13, 2019

The last Council election was dark.  Manipulated by corporate and labor interests using massive amounts of cash and smear campaign tactics, a single candidate was trashed, the voting public was deceived and a rational electoral outcome was smothered.

All four candidates denounced the actions of the Valero / organized labor Political Action Committee (the PAC “Working Families for a Safe Benicia to elect Lionel Largaespada and Christina Strawbridge and to defeat Kari Birdseye”).

In December, Benicia’s new City Council voted unanimously to review the City’s campaign ordinance.  The first discussion of possible changes will happen this Tuesday night, January 15, at 7pm at City Hall (see agenda and reports – PLEASE ATTEND!).

Many in the community have raised questions and made suggestions on how the City can get creative to prevent this kind of thing in our 2020 election.  Here are a few ideas I’ve heard, with some of my own wording and additions:

  1. Benicia’s existing campaign ordinance requires candidates to conduct their campaigns honestly. This does not evidently apply to outside PAC’s.  Should it?  PACs can, and have, lied without consequence.  Should an impartial City commission or staff person be authorized to call out lies?
  2. Should the candidate forum hosted by the Open Government Commission, and designed to counter last minute attacks and hit pieces, be moved back from the Saturday before the election to a date at least two weeks before the election?  Or to a date shortly after actions “inconsistent with the Benicia Code of Fair Campaign Practices” are noted by the Commission?
  3. Should the City be required to post the Open Government forum on its website soon after the event?
  4. The existing ordinance references various kinds of expenditures by outside PAC’s and requires PAC’s to identify who is paying for them. But the ordinance does not reference ads placed on computer platforms and social media accounts like Facebook or Google. Should these be included in the update?
  5. In the last election, city staff posted on the city website the various income and expenditure reports filed by candidates and PACs.  But staff did not offer the public ongoing cumulative summaries and final or near-final totals.  When asked for clarifications, staff  was unable to offer the public assistance in interpreting some of these documents, suggesting concerned residents should approach the FPPC.  Should we require better Benicia  staff oversight and interpretation of Forms 460, 465, 496, 497, etc.?
  6. Polling – the last election featured extensive polling paid for by an local corporation (Valero).  Data from those calls was fed to the Anti-Birdseye PAC and used by their consultants in setting campaign strategies. When a poll is paid for or designed by outsiders engaging in political activity in an attempt to influence a city election, should the polling company and/or the entity paying for the poll be required to disclose who is paying for the poll? And should we require the poll questions to be disclosed to the City to determine whether the poll itself is a campaign advertisement rather than a legitimate poll?
  7. Endorsements – Many groups make endorsements in local elections. But in some cases, those endorsements are made by a small group of leaders of those organizations without ever asking for the consent of their members.  In 2018, we heard from many upset teachers and others that the Napa-Solano Central Labor Council made endorsements without consulting local association members.  When a membership based organization makes an endorsement, should they first be required to actually poll their membership and let the majority of their members vote on an endorsement?  And should those membership results be made available for public review?  And if not, should the endorsement made in a membership organizations’s name by another entity be required to disclose that fact on a flyer or other campaign material?
Benicia City Council, Campaign finance, Dark money, Local elections, Local Regulation, Negative campaigning

Times-Herald: Benicia council to discuss changes to campaign ordinances

Repost from the Vallejo Times-Herald
[Editor: See also my article, “How to make Benicia campaigns fairer and more transparent.”  Please attend Benicia City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 15, 7pm at City Hall.  If you can’t make it, send your thoughts by email. – R.S.]

Benicia council to discuss changes to campaign ordinances

By JOHN GLIDDEN, January 12, 2019 at 3:53 pm

BENICIA — The City Council will discuss Tuesday night whether to pursue possible changes to the city’s campaign ordinances.

The request, from Councilman Tom Campbell, comes after the November 2018 election which saw a special committee, primarily funded by the Valero Benicia Refinery and local unions, spend thousands of dollars supporting two council candidates and opposing a third.

City Hall will provide brief information on a model adopted by the city of Santa Clara, while also seeking additional direction from the Benicia council.

“One of the changes that could be made to Benicia’s campaign ordinances include a disclosure requirement for ‘dark money,’” city staff wrote in a report to councilors. “The city of Santa Clara adopted an ordinance to require disclosure of contributions of $100 or more by any organization that ‘affect or are intended to affect’ an election.”

The city’s 2018 election season turned interesting when the refinery and several trade unions began to fund a special committee with the lengthy name — Working Families for a Strong Benicia, a Coalition of Labor, Industrial Services Companies, Public Safety and Local Leaders Supporting Christina Strawbridge and Lionel Largaespada and Opposing Kari Birdseye for Benicia City Council 2018.

Largaespada and Strawbridge eventually went on to win the two open seats on the five-person City Council. The then-incumbents, Alan Schwartzman and Mark Hughes, both declined to seek re-election to the council.

Prior to inception of the committee, Valero paid for several political-themed phone calls to local residents, which the refinery said was used as polling data. Opponents of the calls, accused the refinery of attempting to influence the city’s election.

“Another change that could be made would be to require more disclosure related to polling. In the past election, the earlier telephone poll did not have disclosures like a campaign poll would have,” staff further wrote in the same report. “It may be possible to require disclosure after the poll is complete. The post poll disclosure would help mitigate any arguments about chilling First Amendment rights.

“From the recent experience,the name of the poll sponsor and the questions would be disclosure items the public would be interested in,” staff added. “Depending on the type of polling, polling is considered core political speech so regulations will have to be carefully drafted to avoid a problem.”

Benicia currently has three campaign related ordinances, including one which requires the disclosure of contributions and expenditures in candidate and ballot measure elections, and voluntary spending limits.

The Benicia City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Tuesday inside the Benicia City Hall, located at 250 East L. St.

Benicia City Council, Campaign finance, Local elections, Local vigilance, Negative campaigning

Council to discuss ordinances to deal with dirty campaigns and overwhelming PAC money

By Roger Straw

IMPORTANT – TUES., JAN 15… See Council’s agenda item 15.B. below and check out the various reports. This item is in response to the nasty attack ads, push polling and huge money spent by Valero and it’s labor buddies in last fall’s campaign.  They successfully smeared Planning Commission Chair Kari Birdseye and helped to elect their chosen candidates. Council and staff have been looking into any measures that can be taken to strengthen Benicia’s campaign ordinance.  PLEASE ATTEND THE COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 15!  Let Council and staff know that this is really important so that we don’t have this again in 2020.  (To send an email comment see WHERE TO WRITE…)

BENICIA CITY COUNCIL
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Benicia City Hall 250 East L. Street
January 15, 2019
7:00 PM

15.B -SECOND STEP OF COUNCIL MEMBER CAMPBELL’S 2-STEP PROCESS

REQUEST TO DISCUSS UPDATING THE CAMPAIGN ORDINANCES (City Attorney)

At the December 18, 2018 City Council meeting, Council Member Campbell’s two-step process request was presented to the Council to consider updates to the city’s campaign ordinances. The Council directed staff to agendize the item for discussion. Staff has included preliminary research on this subject.

Recommendation:

Provide direction on whether the Santa Clara model and any other proposed updates should be considered and whether updates should be discussed and reviewed by an ad hoc group or by the Open Government Commission prior to consideration by the Council.

Staff Report -Campaign Ordinance Updates -Campbell

      1. Two-Step Agenda Request Campbell -Campaign Ordinance Update
      2. Santa Clara Dark Money Ordinance -Campaign Ordinance Update
      3. Campaign Disclosure Forms and Filings City of Santa Clara Webpage -Campaign Ordinance Update
      4. Campaign Regulations City of Santa Clara Web Page -Campaign Ordinance Update
      5. Government Code 84222 Multipurpose Org -Campaign Ordinance Update
      6. Government Code 84211 Contents of Statement -Campaign Ordinance Update
      7. Other Possible Ordinance Updates -Campaign Ordinance Update
Benicia City Council, Campaign finance, Local elections, Local Regulation, Negative campaigning, Public campaign financing

A suggestion for cleaning up Benicia election campaigns: public financing

Council to consider cleaning up election campaigning – Tuesday

From an E-Alert by Benicia Mayor Elizabeth Patterson

Council to consider cleaning up election campaigning – Tuesday

December 14, 2018

[excerpted]… Many people consider the last election flawed because of the excessive money spent by the Political Action Committee of Valero and their affiliated entities’ efforts to buy two council seats.  What more can be done to keep elections from becoming a money-horse race and not about issues?  Below is one approach that could be considered.  Other cities have adopted a variety of programs that could be reviewed and considered.

Governor Brown Signs Major Step Towards Citizen-Funded Elections

SB 1107 signed by Governor Brown after passing legislature with bipartisan support

By Press Release – California Clean Money Campaign, September 29th, 2016

SACRAMENTO — Today, Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill giving all Californian jurisdictions the right to give their citizens a bigger voice in democracy by changing the way election campaigns are financed. SB 1107 amends California’s antiquated ban on public financing of campaigns to allow local governments and the state to pass their own systems for citizen funding of election campaigns to magnify the voices of small donors and everyday voters.

SB 1107 was authored by Senator Ben Allen and coauthored by Senator Loni Hancock and Assemblymembers David Chiu and Lorena Gonzalez. Sponsored by the California Clean Money Campaign and California Common Cause, SB 1107 allows public financing of campaigns in California elections if they’re paid for by dedicated campaign finance trust funds and are “available to all qualified, voluntarily participating candidates for the same office without regard to incumbency or political party preference”.

“Californians are demanding greater accountability from their elected officials, and rightfully so. Anything we can do to empower communities to reduce the influence of money in campaigns is a good thing”, said Senator Ben Allen, author of SB 1107.

SB 1107 passed the legislature with bipartisan support. Republican Senators Anthony Canella (R-Ceres) and Bob Huff (R-Brea) and Assemblymembers Catharine Baker (R-San Ramon), Ling Ling Chang (R-Brea), and David Hadley (R-Torrance) all deserve great credit for standing up for the voices of regular voters against special interests, as do all the Democrats who voted Yes. Senate President pro Tem Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles), Senator Robert Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Los Angeles) and SB 1107’s author Senator Allen (D-Redondo Beach) and Assembly floor manager Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) also deserve special commendation for their leadership in passing SBÂ 1107.

“The undue influence of big money special interests in politics isn’t a partisan issue,” said Assemblymember David Hadley (R-Torrance), one of the key votes in SB 1107 achieving its needed 2/3 majority in the Assembly. “I voted for SB 1107 to give cities and counties the local control they need to develop campaign finance systems that work for them, and look forward to working with the California Clean Money Campaign and others to explore carefully-crafted citizens-funded election systems to strengthen election accountability.”

More than 57,000 Californians signed petitions urging Governor Brown to pass SB 1107, and thousands more called Governor Brown and their legislators. A coalition of 40 state and national organizations weighed in for the bill, contributing an additional 50,000 petition signers from across the country urging California to lead. Besides SB 1107 sponsors California Clean Money Campaign and California Common Cause, organizations that actively worked to pass SB 1107 included: California Church Impact, California Labor Federation, California League of Conservation Voters, California School Employees Association, CALPIRG, Corporate Accountability International, Courage Campaign, CREDO, Daily Kos, Democracy for America, Every Voice, Friends of the Earth, GMO Free USA, League of Women Voters of California, Money Out Voters In, People Demanding Action, People For the American Way, Progressive Democrats of America, Sierra Club California, Represent.US, RootsAction.org, UFCW, and Voices for Progress.

“Californians are crying out for reform of our broken campaign finance system, as shown by the tremendous outpouring of support for SB 1107,” said Trent Lange, President of the California Clean Money Campaign, co-sponsor of SB 1107. “We’re very grateful to Governor Brown and the bipartisan legislative leaders who made its passage possible so that Californians can explore citizen funded elections systems that give regular voters a stronger voice against big money special interests”.

#####

The California Clean Money Campaign is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to lessening the unfair influence of Big Money on election campaigns. For further information, visit www.CAclean.org.